Safety life analysis under the required failure possibility constraint for structure involving fuzzy uncertainty



For ensuring safety service of structure under fuzzy uncertainty, some efficient methods are proposed for analyzing safety life under the constraint that the actual time-dependent failure possibility (TDFP) less than the target failure possibility. The direct dichotomy method is firstly established to solve the safety life. Since the direct dichotomy method needs to iterate the TDFP at all searching points of the safety life and results in large computational cost, the equivalent constraint method (ECM) is established to solve the safety life. In ECM, the equivalence between the constraint of the actual TDFP and the equivalent constraint of the lower boundary of the minimum of the response function is strictly proved by the reduction to absurdity. By equivalently replacing the constraint of the actual TDFP with that of the lower boundary of the minimum of the output response, the computational cost for estimating the safety life is greatly reduced. Two solutions of the safety life based on the ECM are established. One is ECM based dichotomy method. The other is ECM based Newton method, where a simplified derivative solution is deduced to reduce the computational cost. After the implementations of solving the safety life are given in detail, several examples are used to verify the rationality of the established safety life analysis model and the efficiency of the methods for solving safety life.


Safety life Fuzzy uncertainty Equivalent constraint Time-dependent failure possibility 



The authors are thankful for the financial support received from Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants 51475370 and 51775439).


  1. Beer M, Ferson S (2011) Fuzzy probability in engineering. In: Ayyub B (ed) Proceedings of the first international conference on vulnerability and risk analysis and management (ICVRAM 2011) and the fifth international Sumposium on uncertainty modelling and analysis (ISUMA 2011) 11–13 April 2011. University of Maryland, ASCE, Reston, pp 53–61Google Scholar
  2. Beer M, Ferson S, Kreinovich V (2013) Imprecise probabilities in engineering analyses. Mech Syst Signal Process 37:4–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benhaim Y (1996) Must reliability be probabilistic? J Stat Comput Simul 55(3):263–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biswal S, Ramaswamy A (2017) Finite element model updating of concrete structures based on imprecise probability. Mech Syst Signal Process 94:165–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen N, Yu D, Xia B (2016) Uncertainty analysis of a structural-acoustic problem using imprecise probabilities based on p-box representations. Mech Syst Signal Process 80:45–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cremona C, Gao Y (1997) The possibilistic reliability theory: theoretical aspects and application. Struct Saf 19:173–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crespo L, Kenny S, Giesy D (2013) Reliability analysis of polynomial systems subject to P-box uncertainty. Mech Syst Signal Process 37:121–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dubois D, Prade H (1980) Fuzzy sets and systems: theory and applications. Academic, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Elishakoff I, Ferracuti B (2006a) Fuzzy sets based interpretation of the safety factor. Fuzzy Sets Syst 157:2495–2512MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Elishakoff I, Ferracuti B (2006b) Four alternative definitions of the fuzzy safety factor. J Aerosp Eng ASCE 19:281–287CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Gouri R, Srinivas V (2017) A fuzzy approach to reliability based design of storm water drain network. Stoch Env Res Risk A 31:1091–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hurtado J, Alvarez D (2012) Fuzzy structural analysis based on fundamental reliability concepts. Comput Struct 112-113:183–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jacquelin E, Friswell M, Adhikari S (2016) Polynomial chaos expansion with random and fuzzy variables. Mech Syst Signal Process 75:41–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jiang C, Zhang Q, Han X, Liu J, Hu D (2015) Multidimensional parallelepiped model-a new type of non-probabilistic convex model for structural uncertainty analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 103:31–59MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Jiang C, Ni B, Liu N, Han X, Liu J (2016) Interval process model and non-random vibration analysis. J Sound Vib 373:104–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kang Z, Luo Y, Li A (2011) On non-probabilisitc reliability-based design optimization of structures with uncertain-but-bounded parameters. Struct Saf 33:196–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Marano G, Quaranta G (2010) A new possibilistic reliability index definition. Acta Mech 210:291–303CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Park H, Um J, Woo I, Kim J (2012) Application of fuzzy set theory to evaluate the probability of failure in rock slopes. Eng Geol 125:92–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Savioa M (2002) Structural reliability analysis through fuzzy number approach with application to stability. Comput Struct 80:203–213MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. Sexsmith R (1999) Probability-based safety analysis-value and drawbacks. Struct Saf 21:303–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shi Y, Lu Z, Cheng K (2017) Temporal and spatial multi-parameter dynamic reliability and global reliability sensitivity analysis based on the extreme value moments. Struct Multidiscip Optim 56:117–129MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shrestha B, Duckstein L (1998) A fuzzy reliability measure for engineering applications. In: Ayyub BM (ed) Uncertainty modeling and analysis in civil engineering. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, pp 121–135Google Scholar
  23. Sudret B (2008) Analytical derivation of the outcrossing rate in time-variant reliability problems. Struct Infrastruct Eng 4(5):353–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tang Z, Lu Z, Hu J (2014) An efficient approach for design optimization of structures involving fuzzy variables. Fuzzy Sets Syst 255:52–73MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tu J, Choi K, Park Y (1999) A new study on reliability-based design optimization. J Mech Des 121:557–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vapnik V (1998) Statistical learning theory. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. Vapnik V (2000) The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer Verlag, New YorkCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Wang L, Wang X, Chen X (2015) Time-variant reliability model and its measure index of structures based on a non-probabilistic interval process. Acta Mech 226(10):3221–3241MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wang L, Wang X, Su H (2017a) Reliability estimation of fatigue crack growth prediction via limited measured data. Int J Mech Sci 121:44–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang Z, Cheng X, Liu J 2017b Time-dependent concurrent reliability-based design optimization integrating experiment-based model validation. Struct Multidiscip Optim 1–9Google Scholar
  31. Wang L, Wang X, Li Y (2017c) Structural time-dependent reliability assessment of the vibration active control system with unknown-but-bounded uncertainties. Struct Control Health Monit 24(10):e1965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wang L, Wang X, Wu D 2017d Structural optimization oriented time-dependent reliability methodology under static and dynamic uncertainties. Struct Multidiscip Optim 1–19Google Scholar
  33. Yu S, Wang Z, Zhang K (2018) Sequential time-dependent reliability analysis for the lower extremity exoskeleton under uncertainty. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 170:45–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yun W, Lu Z, Jiang X, Zhao L (2017) Maximum probable life time analysis under the required time-dependent failure probability constraint and its meta-model estimation. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55:1439–1451MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zimmermann H (1992) Fuzzy set theory and its applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, BostonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of AeronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations